Case Marking Variation in Heritage Slavic Languages in Toronto

Not So Different

Dados Bibliográficos

ID7900611
AutoresPaulina Łyskawa (0000-0002-6189-9852, University of Maryland), Naomi Nagy (0000-0002-2895-2447, University of Toronto, autor correspondente)
Ano2020
Volume70
FascículoS1
Páginas122-156
Data de publicação2020-03-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoLanguage Learning (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0023-8333 • E-ISSN: 1467-9922
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/lang.12348
OpenAlexW2945651733
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas17
Referências citadas47

We examined case‐marking variation in heritage Polish, Russian, and Ukrainian. Comparing heritage to homeland Polish and Ukrainian speakers, we found only a few types and a few tokens of systematic distinction between heritage and homeland varieties. A total of 6,291 instances of nouns and pronouns were extracted from transcribed conversations with 62 speakers. Comparing normative forms to observed forms in logistic regression analyses showed that the form of the nominal and the case selector have significant effects on the rate of match between normative and observed forms, while declension does not. Most mismatches in the heritage data were replaced by the nominative, a pattern which is also occasionally found in homeland speech. The second most frequent pattern is genitive–accusative mismatch in specific contexts, in both heritage and homeland speech. Importantly, no significant differences between homeland and heritage speakers emerged, with 8% mismatch attested in the heritage and 2% in homeland data

Genitive case · Heritage language · Homeland · Linguistics · Normative · Noun · Political science · Slavic languages · Ukrainian · Variation (astronomy) · History · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Law · Linguistic Variation and Morphology · Linguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity · Philosophy